Same Log Entry For Different Finds

[+Team_LPD]

I know this is just a personal thing with me, but it rubs me the wrong way to see "Out geocaching today.....blah, blah TFTC" in multiple caches. I guess its the cut & paste thing. Takes something away from reading the logs. I've done multiple caches and when I log them I like to leave a personal touch. I mean, add a little bit of personality to the logs......pleeeeeez

[+norsehawk]

some people aren't as eloquent as others, i will admit that I have used the cut and paste for the basis of the logs on a certain day, but I try to say something about what I saw, condition of the cache or whatever.

[+Iowa Tom]

My way of leaving my mark is by telling a story whenever I can. I long to get notes from three different guys in my area. They are often hilarious.

[+unicyclist]

I have often done this. My reason is that I will 8 finds 3 weeks later. I log very late and 8 caches from that long ago seem to blend into my mind.

[+Prime Suspect]

I've noticed a trend where owners are noting on their cache pages that cookie-cutter logs will be deleted.

[+Team Perks]

Some caches are so NOT memorable that by the time I get home, I've completely forgotten which particular cache that was. If the cache owner can't give me at least one decent memory, I don't believe I'm obligated to say something unique in my log.

[+fizzymagic]

Leaving cookie-cutter logs is rude. Period. If the cache hider could take the trouble to hide the cache, then it's only appropriate that you take the trouble to remember it. Doesn't have to be a novel; a short sentence that shows you remember that particular cache is enough, in my opinion.

 

For people who do so many un-memorable caches in a day that they can't remember them afterwards: what does that say about your caching experience? Who would do a hobby where, at the end of the day, you can't even remember what you did? Is it really all about racking up the numbers?

[+Indotguy]

I know this is just a personal thing with me, but it rubs me the wrong way to see "Out geocaching today.....blah, blah TFTC" in multiple caches. I guess its the cut & paste thing. Takes something away from reading the logs. I've done multiple caches and when I log them I like to leave a personal touch. I mean, add a little bit of personality to the logs......pleeeeeez

 

This annoys me as well. I presume some folks don't type and others are simply lazy. Really late logger are another pet peeve, unless of course they have a good excuse.

[+leather-man]

I don't care if they cut and paste in my logs.

I don't care if they walk, run or skip to my caches.

I don't care if they TNLN.

 

The point is, as long as people attempt to find my caches I'm a happy camper.

[+CheshireFrog]

Leaving cookie-cutter logs is rude. Period. If the cache hider could take the trouble to hide the cache, then it's only appropriate that you take the trouble to remember it. Doesn't have to be a novel; a short sentence that shows you remember that particular cache is enough, in my opinion.

 

For people who do so many un-memorable caches in a day that they can't remember them afterwards: what does that say about your caching experience? Who would do a hobby where, at the end of the day, you can't even remember what you did? Is it really all about racking up the numbers?

 

Cookie Cutter caches get Cookie Cutter logs. I don't see that as rude, but rather kind given what I could say about some of the uninspired, me-too collections of busted McCrap that litter some suburban areas here. I understand full well that families with kids, especially in strollers, may like this, so rather than knock the cache I simply acknowledge it was there and move on.

 

Fortunately a little research allows me to avoid most of these, and for the ones I do find I tend to be polite and not much else.

[+briansnat]

I'm not crazy about them, but at least the person logged something. I'd rather a cookie cutter log than no log.

 

But when you have a cache that is a 5 mile RT hike over some rough terrain to an outstanding view, you sometimes wonder if the person who writes "Found it, TFTC" was actually there.

 

As far a deleting cookie cutter logs for legit finds, I think that's the height of peevishness. Its a sin far worse than cutting and pasting logs.

[+Yellow ants]

As far a deleting cookie cutter logs for legit finds, I think that's the height of peevishness. Its a sin far worse than cutting and pasting logs.

 

You da man, briansnat.

[+sbell111]

When I first started playing the game, My logs pretty much were all the same. 'I found it. This is what I traded. Thanks for the fun.' Caches that left me with a special memory got (and still get) verbiage added that described my experience. If there is a problem with the cache. I add it to my log.

 

These logs weren't really cut-n-paste, but they were all pretty much the same.

 

Over the years, my logs evolved into a cut-n-paste that pretty much explained what I was doing that day. 'Found during my trip to meet up with family at Cedar Pointe. This is what I traded. Thanks for the side trip.'

 

I don't see me changing how I log caches. I'm not really sorry that you don't approve.

[+Semper Questio]

If there was nothing particularly special to me about the cache, the location, or the experience, I'm not going to burn a lot of time and effort trying to make up something special to say about it. The reverse is equally true. If it is special to me in some way ro something special happened, my log will reflect that. And most especially, as our grinning amphibian friend said, cookie-cutter caches get cookie-cutter logs.

[+Mudfrog]

Leaving cookie-cutter logs is rude. Period. If the cache hider could take the trouble to hide the cache, then it's only appropriate that you take the trouble to remember it. Doesn't have to be a novel; a short sentence that shows you remember that particular cache is enough, in my opinion.

 

For people who do so many un-memorable caches in a day that they can't remember them afterwards: what does that say about your caching experience? Who would do a hobby where, at the end of the day, you can't even remember what you did? Is it really all about racking up the numbers?

 

Your opinion is noted but not everyone plays your way!

 

Not sure how rudeness comes into play. Yes it can be disapointing to the cache owner to get this or a TNLN only type log but it's still not rude. I won't tell you how lame your cache is (to me), but it will get a "found it, thanks for the cache" type log if i think it was. Even with these i very rarely copy and paste my online logs. If i do then it is because we found a bunch that day and very few of them stood out.

 

As far as doing so many in a day,,, that can be fun for some of us too. Yes they are a blur sometimes but being out with good friends, running around the countryside, and seeing how many we can come up with that day is a great experience as well!

[+Team Perks]

Leaving cookie-cutter logs is rude. Period. If the cache hider could take the trouble to hide the cache, then it's only appropriate that you take the trouble to remember it. Doesn't have to be a novel; a short sentence that shows you remember that particular cache is enough, in my opinion.

 

For people who do so many un-memorable caches in a day that they can't remember them afterwards: what does that say about your caching experience? Who would do a hobby where, at the end of the day, you can't even remember what you did? Is it really all about racking up the numbers?

If I go out and find ten caches in a day, and two of them were parking lot hides (hey, by the time I've gone through the trouble of driving there, I may as well look for the cache, even if it sucks...), by the time I get around to logging the caches several days or a week later, I don't see why you think it's a sin to have only the fuzziest of recollections about one or two of the lame ones. Sure I try to filter out the ones I think are going to to be lame by my personal standards, but it isn't exactly easy to judge quality based on past logs, since (as other recent topics have pointed out) people feel they need to tiptoe around the fact that some caches are lame, or downright lousy.

 

If I enjoyed a cache, whether it be a creative hide or a great hike, I'm going to write a glowing review. But I don't see why I should feel any sort of obligation to create some sort of positive or thoughtful memory about a cache where the most positive thing I can say about it is "Gee, at least I got a smiley out of it."

 

If the cache owner feels slighted by that, perhaps they should re-think the type or number of caches they hide.

[+wimseyguy]

Cookie cutter caches deserve cookie cutter logs. The amount of creative effort I put into writing my log will almost always be affected by the amount you put into hiding the cache. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate every single cache that was hidden for me to find. I like finding caches; I like it a lot.

 

What I don't understand is cachers posting glowing positive logs on caches that clearly are not, or even worse are in clear violation of the guidelines, but no one wants to be a spoilsport.

You don't have to say something nasty or mean, but at least try and tell the truth please. Simply saying thanks for the cache is plenty good in most cases.

 

And deleting logs that aren't to an owner's liking is also wrong (unless there is a specific logging requirement that isn't adhered to, or a spoiler is posted.)

[+Snoogans]

As far a deleting cookie cutter logs for legit finds, I think that's the height of peevishness. Its a sin far worse than cutting and pasting logs.

 

You da man, briansnat.

 

I would have used much harsher adjectives than Brian did.

 

Geocaching seems to have more than its share of Type-A personalities with unrealistic expectations.

[+tozainamboku]

Lots of reason for short cookie cutter logs. Some may be rude, some may just be practical. I try to write something about each find, but sometimes there isn't that much to say. Sometimes I leave a short log to express my opinion that the cache wasn't all that much. I get plenty of TNLNSL logs on my long hike high terrain caches. Some people are just not very expressive.

1. Person not eloquent or not a good typist. Logs Found it. Thanks
   
2. Not really much you can say about this cache. Logs TNLNSL, TFTC
   
3. Can't remember much about the hunt. Logs Found the cache. It was fun.
   
4. Found 100 cache that day. Logs 1 out of 100 found. Thanks
   
5. Cache was lame. Logs Thanks for the smiley.
   

[+parker313]

I know that I like reading the detailed logs. Therefore, *I* try and leave a detailed log that someone else might enjoy reading. I'm not witty or clever and have a very plain writing style but I like coming back and filling out the logs - not just to get another smiley asap, but just so the cache owner knows I was out there hunting their cache. Plus, the sooner I can log the find, the fresher the details still are in my mind.

 

If other people want to leave cookie cutter logs, it's no harm to me, but I do enjoy the more detailed logs I think it's because I almost get a sense of "community" thinking that there have been other cachers out there doing just what I was doing to get to the same cache - it's just kinda cool

[+ar_kayaker]

Which would you rather have for your wal-mart lamp post cache:

 

1. SLTFTC

2. Found it.

3. Find number 15 for the day!

4. My, what a lame cache. As soon as I came in site of the Wal-mart sign I knew what I was going to find and where to look. Parked 200 feet away and left GPSr in the car to add to the challenge.

[+fizzymagic]

Not sure how rudeness comes into play. Yes it can be disapointing to the cache owner to get this or a TNLN only type log but it's still not rude.

Please note that by "cookie cutter" logs I am NOT referring to short logs; I am, instead, referring to cut-and-paste logs like this:

Cache #19 out of 43 today, on a run with Cacher1, Cacher2, Cacher3, Cacher4, and Cacher5.

Repeated 5 times on each cache for each cacher. Such logs are rude, inconsiderate, and useless. They often displace logs with useful information from PQs, for example. Just one more way that the numbers hounds are ruining the hobby for the rest of us.

 

Short logs, like TNLNSL, are not necessarily rude. They are, for example, a good way to indicate displeasure with a cache. If I get one of those, I assume the person hated my cache and I will often email them asking what was wrong with it.

Edited August 8, 2006 by fizzymagic

[+whistler & co.]

I believe I know what provoked the OP's comments...37 logs that were exactly the same for every cache, from a quickly found lamp post micro to a tricky climb up a beautiful waterfall.

 

I usually write a detailed log for every cache we find. I also generally write positive logs, although I do on occassion write short and/or negative logs when the situation warrants.

 

Cookie cutter logs are like preprinted ("Happy Holidays from the Smith Family") Christmas cards. Yes, it's nice the Smiths were thinking of me, but too bad they feel exactly the same about me as they do their dear, old Grandma and their 12-year-old paperboy...we all got the same card!

 

Would it really be SO hard to mention the pretty view, the "nice & dry inside" cache, the pinchy plants, or the scary vagrant? ANYTHING to show that you actually remember the cache? Expecting the same quality of hides from all cachers is like expecting the same performance on the SAT's from all students, those in the gifted classes as well as those in learning support. You don't criticize the child in learning support for not being able to handle calculus, you say "Good job" when he masters addition and subtraction, and you are thankful when he gives you a "Hapee Muthers Day" card because he is making an effort and doing his best. Yes, there are stupid caches that really suck, but maybe some "lame" caches are the hider's best effort. We don't always need to go overboard with unjustified praise for every cache we find, but a kind word never hurt anyone either.

Edited August 8, 2006 by whistler & co.

[+Kit Fox]

I look at this issue in two ways, as a cache finder, an as a cache hider.

 

Found it logs:

 

Lame, uninspired caches get short logs from me. Any cache that is at least a little bit interesting gets enough of a descriptive log to assure the owner I found his cache. Caches of great quality always get long descriptive logs.

 

As a hider, the biggest insult to me is reading logs described by Fizzymagic, when a power group find 40 of my caches in a day. What is even worse is someone writing a lame log for a hand crafted cache, or special location that I put a lot of effort into.

 

Many of my Lead by Example Caches, get good logs, because they require extra effort to find them.. Any cacher that takes the time an effort to seek 3 1/2 * + terrain caches, usually takes the time to write a nice log. Cookie cutter logs don't apply, because these cachers could easily find 30 lamppost micros, in the time it takes them to log one of my remote caches.

 

I might get 95% less logs from my hard to reach caches, but the logs are priceless to me. Priceless log

 

Another example

 

A prime example of a lame log. "2:14pm 4th of 13 for the day.

TNLNSL"

Edited August 8, 2006 by Kit Fox

[+sbell111]

Are you guys ever happy?

[+Osoling]

I use Cache Mate on my PDA, and sometimes refer to the past logs when I get stuck. Nothing is more frustrating when on a run than reading the same usless post on like 11 different caches. It drives me nuts. Part of the game that I like (although I am really new) is deciphering the timy little clues that people put into things. The cut and paste is worse than counter-productive.

 

I agree with the folks who say that the story of the log is a bog deal. I love reading creative log entries!

[+sbell111]

That's a bummer, I guess, but I don't see how you are going to get any more secret info if I type in a brief found it log than if I copy and paste. Either way, I'm not posting a spoiler.

 

Perhaps you should just set up GSAK so you get more of the logs.

Edited August 8, 2006 by sbell111

[+edscott]

some observations....

I seldom leave a generic log comment even when the cache itself really begs for one... but, I can understand why they all seem to blend when the finder is one of a large group of people finding a large group of caches. Unless I actually experience the moment of the find myself, I would also be likely to have a limited memory as well, thus nothing to write about. As far as deleting logs that are poorly written according to the owners opinion... That's just plain stupid. It's about finding the cache, not writing an essay. Goes right up there with archiving cache pages because of poor spelling and grammar. .. and the comments about better caches get better logs.. right on!! If your caches seem to collect lame logs think about it.

[+Rich the Bushwhacker]

As in life, there's all types of people caching. Some eloquent and educated, some not. Some regard logs as unrewarding paperwork. Some don't even log online. Some are just tired, in a hurry and want to get online logging out of the way.

 

Expecting everyone to conform to your particular standard is an exercise in frustration.

Edited August 8, 2006 by Rich the Bushwhacker

[+Thrak]

You could always get logs like this one:

July 13 by retiredprof (2371 found)

enjoyed finding your very special cache. after much deliberation, we decided to take the emerald earrings, and leave a rolex watch. it's not every day that one finds such a high class hide. let's hope it never gets muggled. thanks for the fun.

Edited August 8, 2006 by Thrak

[+Recdiver]

I've noticed a trend where owners are noting on their cache pages that cookie-cutter logs will be deleted.

Well that would be sad. Unfortunately I often don't have anything memorable to say in my logs. Especially if we are doing a bunch of caches in one day. It is very difficult for this old brain to remember fine details. If we do a cache runs often the logs sound like "This was the 7th cache of the day. Thank you for bringing us to the alley behind the take out chicken place. I had no idea that grease baking in the sun could smell that bad."

[+Recdiver]

Leaving cookie-cutter logs is rude. Period. If the cache hider could take the trouble to hide the cache, then it's only appropriate that you take the trouble to remember it. Doesn't have to be a novel; a short sentence that shows you remember that particular cache is enough, in my opinion.

 

For people who do so many un-memorable caches in a day that they can't remember them afterwards: what does that say about your caching experience? Who would do a hobby where, at the end of the day, you can't even remember what you did? Is it really all about racking up the numbers?

It says as much about the quality caches in my area as it does my caching experiences. I'd rather get 3 caches in an entire day of caching if it takes me way off the beaten path and to memorable spots. For those I'll right much more.

If on the other hand I am doing a number of urban caches in an area and they all run together why should I be penalized for writing a lackluster log entry?

Now in the first instance if a hider has taken the time to place a cache far up a forest service road and I have to hike in to see a great view of a mountain lake then I’ll right about that and go on for more than one sentence. However don’t expect great literature for a magnetic key holder stuck on a guard rail, unless it brings to spot where I have a great view of a mountain stream working it’s way down a mountain side.

[+Team Perks]

You could always get logs like this one:

July 13 by retiredprof (2371 found)

enjoyed finding your very special cache. after much deliberation, we decided to take the emerald earrings, and leave a rolex watch. it's not every day that one finds such a high class hide. let's hope it never gets muggled. thanks for the fun.

That reminds me of my standard snarky closing line for crummy hides: Thanks for bringing us to your special place!

 

[+briansnat]

You could always get logs like this one:

July 13 by retiredprof (2371 found)

enjoyed finding your very special cache. after much deliberation, we decided to take the emerald earrings, and leave a rolex watch. it's not every day that one finds such a high class hide. let's hope it never gets muggled. thanks for the fun.

That reminds me of my standard snarky closing line for crummy hides: Thanks for bringing us to your special place!

 

 

Thats a good one, I may steal it.

[+The Cheeseheads]

Which would you rather have for your wal-mart lamp post cache:

 

1. SLTFTC

2. Found it.

3. Find number 15 for the day!

4. My, what a lame cache. As soon as I came in site of the Wal-mart sign I knew what I was going to find and where to look. Parked 200 feet away and left GPSr in the car to add to the challenge.

If I were potentially looking for this cache and couldn't tell from the description that it was a WMLPC, I'd be hoping to see a #4 in there...

[+Renegade Knight]

Leaving cookie-cutter logs is rude. Period. If the cache hider could take the trouble to hide the cache, then it's only appropriate that you take the trouble to remember it. Doesn't have to be a novel; a short sentence that shows you remember that particular cache is enough, in my opinion.

 

For people who do so many un-memorable caches in a day that they can't remember them afterwards: what does that say about your caching experience? Who would do a hobby where, at the end of the day, you can't even remember what you did? Is it really all about racking up the numbers?

 

Cookie Cutter caches get Cookie Cutter logs. I don't see that as rude, but rather kind given what I could say about some of the uninspired, me-too collections of busted McCrap that litter some suburban areas here. I understand full well that families with kids, especially in strollers, may like this, so rather than knock the cache I simply acknowledge it was there and move on.

 

Fortunately a little research allows me to avoid most of these, and for the ones I do find I tend to be polite and not much else.

You are both right. Logs are how finders thank the cache owner. A log that says more than "TFTC" means a bit more to the cache owner. Having said that if the cache is ho hum, it's a lot harder to come up with a log longer than "TFTC". In spite of all that, cookie cutter anything is in the eye of the beholder. The spark of life and living it to the fullest is not a property of a cache or a log. It's the person behind them. There is your third angle.

[+hikergps]

I've noticed a trend where owners are noting on their cache pages that cookie-cutter logs will be deleted.

 

That's crap. If someone did that to one of my logs, cookie cutter or not, I would be pissed. Whether it is cc log or a 20 page disertation of your find, and you met the requirements of logging a find, it is a find.

 

But, it's not about the numbers so it doesn't matter anyhow.

[+Team_LPD]

I believe I know what provoked the OP's comments...37 logs that were exactly the same for every cache, from a quickly found lamp post micro to a tricky climb up a beautiful waterfall.

 

LOL, yeah I think you got it. Even if I find a "lame" cache, I try and add a log that has a personal touch. Nothing elaborate, just a line or two but it doesn't sound like a cookie cutter response.

[+DocDiTTo]

Some caches are simply too bland to fire the synapses that trigger short term memory. Copy and paste logs are all I have to use in those circumstances. Hide a cache that's memorable, and I'll log what I remember. If your caches were hidden with creativity, flair, and much thought, the logs you read from them will be written the same way. Expecting top shelf logs from a bottom of the barrel hide isn't very realistic. I've logged caches with nothing more than "TFTC". If you see such a log from me, be in known that I thought your cache sucked. If it was any good, my log would have been too. Deleting such logs is pure pettiness. If you don't like my log, read someone elses.

[+Kit Fox]

If you find you're short on things to say in your log, you can always have this log generator do the work for you.

 

My personal favorites are:

 

This cache was fantastic! A 12-billion dollar satellite system overhead, and this is the best hide you could come up with! Cheers!!

 

This cache was incredible from beginning to end. You should turn your GPS over to the nearest authorities! Wow!!

 

This cache should be archived so you can save a little face. A micro in the woods after a 2 hour hike is very original. Thanks for the great time!!

[+Faith the Aquariaqueen]

I generally log for 3 different people in the household. Myself and two sons. I usually make a personal note on mine and my sons' logs are usually a cookie cutter log saying that they were caching with their mother and brother. Unless one of them had a specific experience, the logs are very simple. It gets time consuming to come up with 3 fascinating stories for each of the caches.

[+Mudfrog]

Found it logs:

 

Lame, uninspired caches get short logs from me. Any cache that is at least a little bit interesting gets enough of a descriptive log to assure the owner I found his cache. Caches of great quality always get long descriptive logs.

 

UH HUH! This is how i log as well.

 

I am curious though. How much can be said in, say for example, a WMLPC found log. I sure don't want to be rude or hurt someone's feelings by posting a short TNLN or "cookie cutter" type log on this excellent cache hide. So what else can be added, without lying of course, to make it sound better?

 

What i'm getting at is that it's hard to come up with new, different, and exciting things to say in the logs for the multitude of WMPLCs that we've found. I don't cut and paste very often but if i did, these would be the ones i would use them on as they sure don't deserve any special write up at all!

[+Kit Fox]

Found it logs:

 

Lame, uninspired caches get short logs from me. Any cache that is at least a little bit interesting gets enough of a descriptive log to assure the owner I found his cache. Caches of great quality always get long descriptive logs.

 

UH HUH! This is how i log as well.

 

I am curious though. How much can be said in, say for example, a WMLPC found log. I sure don't want to be rude or hurt someone's feelings by posting a short TNLN or "cookie cutter" type log on this excellent cache hide. So what else can be added, without lying of course, to make it sound better?

 

What i'm getting at is that it's hard to come up with new, different, and exciting things to say in the logs for the multitude of WMPLCs that we've found. I don't cut and paste very often but if i did, these would be the ones i would use them on as they sure don't deserve any special write up at all!

 

For the worst caches, I write nothing more than my find number (example = #910 or #910 DPM)

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

I can see it coming - soon y'all will want a grading system for logs!

 

Caches will stipulate "This cache is restricted to C+ rated loggers and above"

 

Sheesh.

Edited August 9, 2006 by TheAlabamaRambler

[+Mudfrog]

I can see it coming - soon y'all will want a grading system for logs!

 

Caches will stipulate "This cache is restricted to C+ rated loggers and above"

 

Sheesh.

 

You got me laughing with that one but then i realized,,,,, IVE SEEN STRANGER THINGS HAPPEN!

[+baloo&bd]

I must say that all these "preferences" and "peeves" are making it tougher to cache.

 

I have done both, left long, hopefully eloquent logs depicting the efforts to find the cache and the area. On one series, I even cut and pasted a paragraph description on each of the series since it applied to all (the ultimate cookie cutter). I have also left the "8 of 14 today. TFTC" type logs.

 

There are caches that either did not inspire a long description, maybe because someone is starting to get higher numbers and has seen many like it before. Possibly someone is following the sage advice of "..if you can't say something nice." or, and is the case on many who spent a full day caching, you want to get it logged and are just too tired to put anything but the minimum.

 

Guarantee that if someone posted on their site that cookie cutter responses would be deleted, I would be among the first to post something like "TFTC". Childish, yes. It's just one of my "preferred peeves".

[+sbell111]

What i'm getting at is that it's hard to come up with new, different, and exciting things to say in the logs for the multitude of WMPLCs that we've found. I don't cut and paste very often but if i did, these would be the ones i would use them on as they sure don't deserve any special write up at all!

It's not just light pole caches, its any kind of cache that you've seen a million times. Drive to a miscellaneous park, walk 1/4 mile down path with no real scenery, find the ammo box next to a tree covered with sticks. Its a perfectly good cache, but tomorrow I'm not going to remember anything about it.

[+sbell111]

Guarantee that if someone posted on their site that cookie cutter responses would be deleted, I would be among the first to post something like "TFTC". Childish, yes. It's just one of my "preferred peeves".

I agree. It would simply result in my writing a very short, bland found-it log rather than copying and pasting a short, bland found it log.

[+The Leprechauns]

Guarantee that if someone posted on their site that cookie cutter responses would be deleted, I would be among the first to post something like "TFTC". Childish, yes. It's just one of my "preferred peeves".

I agree. It would simply result in my writing a very short, bland found-it log rather than copying and pasting a short, bland found it log.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

My logging has transitioned from one end of the spectrum to the other.

 

When I started playing in '03 I wrote extensive logs - it wasn't uncommon to exceed the size limit and have to use two logs, parts 1 & 2.

 

I tried to make logs at least interesting if not humerous.

 

Then I got into CacheLeague, a competitive team-based numbers hunt, and it wasn't uncommon to find 100 caches a day. My team won Highest Team Day and First Place Team against teams all over the country. Logging that many caches (we found thousands, don't remember the actual number) became a time-consuming PITA, so I started doing the cut-n-paste thing.

 

After CacheLeague I had made a lot of friends in the Southeastern US geocaching community, and started caching in groups on cache runs - again, we found a bunch, and logging them was still onerous.

 

Then this whole numbers-ho criticism thing got started, and I quit keeping track of caches altogether. My find count is of no interest to me, nor of any possible value to anyone else, so why maintain it? Ergo, I quit logging.

 

At about this time I was invited to become a Groundspeak Volunteer Reviewer (the now defunct NatureFish, RIP) and felt that I had to be very careful to avoid controversy (boy, did I ever fail at THAT!), and felt that no log at all was the best way to do that.

 

I led a World Record attempt in Dallas the weekend before GW4 - many of you will remember that debacle - where we found 312 and DNF'd 42 in 24 hours. During that week I found another 400+ with other cachers, and logged nary a one of them.

 

Now I rarely cache alone, and have a rep as a tour-guide that will take folks on cache runs. I visit a lot of caches multiple times this way, and unless I trade something or it needs mainenance I don't see any point in writing a note - the folks I am with will, that's enough.

 

So, the idea that a cachers log has anything to do with the percieved quality of the hide isn't always true - I have enjoyed every cache I ever found and if I don't log it there should be no reflection on the cache or cacher - logging just became a pain and numbers irrelevant.

 

Now when I go out I don't even keep notes - at the end of the day I often can't tell you which or how many caches I have visited - finding them is the fun part for me, logging them isn't. I usually log events, and will log Needs Maintenance or outstanding caches if I am alone... if I am with others who will log it I don't.

 

Hope all that helps owners realize that there is no insult intended if a cacher chooses to cut-n-paste or not to log it at all!

 

Ed

Edited August 9, 2006 by TheAlabamaRambler